Yeah, these hurt to see. I can't speak to Black Myth (as I haven't played it), and we'll set the whole DLC conversation aside, but 3 shouldn't even be in contention. It's practically a poll to see who is cultivating the worst gambling habits in kids.

He's really consistent, but, for whatever reason, never ranks in my personal favorites. I do think Oppenheimer was excellent and the best film of his career. Lanthimos, Eggers, Villeneuve, and Tarantino are some of my favorites.

And to be fair, I also think Negative Gorr is busted beyond belief, but at least you know to retreat instantly unless you're in a mirror. Arishem is just blind madness the entire game.

And not acknowledging that the IGN review and the article critiquing DA published by them were from different people is also misleading. Making it seem like IGNs review was disingenuous when the reviewer could have truly enjoyed it. Again, not to dismiss all criticism, but the framing here is odd.

Showing user reviews for games that we know got review bombed for reasons entirely unrelated to design isn't helpful to the argument here. There are valid criticisms of Concord and DA, but those user reviews were flooded with hateful rhetoric that I would never want taken as a design guide.

I think they're could be a good point to be made about this, but I don't believe it's illustrated particularly well here. The video does nothing to differentiate meaningful criticism from grifter arguments and even displays grifter related issues as if they are meaningful feedback.